You should consider adding links to Garf's site and original compile. I already did that for ReplayGain. Some people are a bit cautious about ICL compiles so it's always good to have alternatives available.

It should also be noted that with the GT3b1 encoder, quality settings between 4.01 and 4.99 (inclusive) will give incremental increases in bitrate above what the 1.0.1 version would generate.

GT3b1 currently uses a nominal bitrate 20kbps higher for each quality level of 5 and above, but anything over -q 4 begins getting an increase as well. A quality setting between 4 and 5 with GT3b1 will use a "portion" of the tuning enhancements, but not the "full effect" of those enhancements until you get to -q 5 or higher.

This can be noted, for instance, by encoding a track at -q 4.25 with v1.0.1, and the same track at -q 4.25 with GT3b1.

QuantumKnot's "Recommended Encoder Versions and Settings" is a good attempt at giving newbies to Vorbis like myself an idea of what encoder to use. But there is no mention on what quality setting to actually use for transparency.

For example, what -q setting should I use in oggenc GT3b1 to get a quality equivalent to lame --alt-preset standard, for example?

Are there any recommended -q settings on this forum for the various versions of oggenc which give quality equivalent to the various --alt-preset settings in lame?

Adding this information to QuantumKnot's FAQ, if it exists, would go a long way to helping new Vorbis users not burn their fingers by encoding at too low or too high quality settings during their early migration days.

QuantumKnot's "Recommended Encoder Versions and Settings" is a good attempt at giving newbies to Vorbis like myself an idea of what encoder to use. But there is no mention on what quality setting to actually use for transparency.

For example, what -q setting should I use in oggenc GT3b1 to get a quality equivalent to lame --alt-preset standard, for example?

Are there any recommended -q settings on this forum for the various versions of oggenc which give quality equivalent to the various --alt-preset settings in lame?

Adding this information to QuantumKnot's FAQ, if it exists, would go a long way to helping new Vorbis users not burn their fingers by encoding at too low or too high quality settings during their early migration days.

Regards,Vinu.

The problem is that 'transparency' is a very subjective thing and different people have different 'ears'. For some who arent sensitive to pre-echo and stereo separation, -q 1 is 'transparent. For' me, -q 4 may be 'transparent' while to others who are sensitive to the HF boost, -q 9 or 10 is still NOT 'transparent'.

Garf has recommended that you start at -q 5 in GT3b1 and if ABXing shows that its not transparent, continue moving up. Personally, I use -q 5 when using GT3b1 and that's the lowest you can go to get the full benefits of his tunings.

I just wanna add my personnal feeling about it, I have a 150gig experience in Vorbis now & I just wanna tell that I disagree with pointing total ogg newbie to GT3B2 instead of pointing them to the last official version first.

GT3B2 is absolutly NOT the standard in Vorbis in the wild ... it is an advanced HA user toy ...

on 4000 vorbis rip in the wild ... you will found : 1 Garf tuned rip at best ...

so if you are a total Ogg Vorbis newbie try last official Monty version first ... & see if the quality is enough for you ... & there is many chance (95% I would say) that it will be enought for you ...

(Note: Lame users are very easy to convert while MPC users are very hard ...)

... so if you can't ABX audio artefacts, it is most likely that you will stick with V1.01 ...I know more than 25 Ogg Vorbis ripper friends & several Vorbis networks ...

NONE of them is using neither GT3B1 nor GT3B2 ...

I don't say that Garf, QuantumKnot, aoTuVa maker & John33 work is bad ... it is GREAT indeed ... but it will only be usefull in two case IMVHO:1: Monty include the tweak to the official version without the damn 20Kbps bitrate jump.2: They fork & create their real own encoder tuned for 64to128==>movie & 128to256==> music which will have an harmonized bitrate jump & willl cover all the audio/video bitrate range ... if they would do so ... they should reduce the quality setting mapping to keep the parity with the official version ... then we will have the equivalent of what is Lame versus official MP3 ...

In the wild estimation:

Versions:pre-RC3: 4%RC3: 15%V1.00: 70%V1.01: 10%post CSV: 1%GT3B: 0%

Settings:Q4: 5%Q5: 65%Q6: 20%Q7: 2%Q8: 2%Other: 6%

... so the Ogg Vorbis Standard is clearly V1.01 Q5 ... & that is what I recommend to Ogg Vorbis newbies ...

Point taken. I'll include the official encoder as well for completeness. However, there is no golden rule which says the 'standard' version has to be the recommended one or the best one.

The purpose of this page is to let everyone know what is currently the best quality Vorbis encoder out there (whether it be for listening tests, archiving, etc.) and judging from the opinions of most people in the GT3b1 thread, Garf's tunings were superior to the official version.

The biggest factor in determining popularity is the amount of coverage. Hence you see the Xiph.Org version everywhere since its got its own page on Vorbis.com while GT3b1, as you point out, is only known by the few who visit HA.org. And for those newbies who do visit HA.org, they probably already have some experience with the Vorbis at Xiph.org, so informing them of Garf's version can only expand their impression of Vorbis as a codec of potential.

Why recommend the standard, just because it is the standard, when there is something claimed to be better, is compatible, and ifree to use?

Hi QuantumKnot,I wanted to complain a little bit about the "GT3b2" confusion... The same dénomination (Gt3b2 for an older Garf tuned version and for the John33 merge between original Gt3b1 and 1.0.1) isn't very newbiefriendly...Of course your "Ogg history" should put away any confusion but maybe this issue should be solved by a new denomination...However my purpose wasn't to complain, i respect your great tuning work (and others coder one) for the ogg codec and i would like to see Xiph taking care about your worl...Please apologise if the GT3b2 denomination issue has been discussed yet (it's quite probable...)...

Best regards,Tanguy

PS: I've well understood tht the actual GT3b2 version is the John33 merge between 1.01 and GT3b1 and so i'm aware thats GT3b2 IS the recommanded version...

This GT3b2 should be exactly the same as the one John33 did so we decided to keep it consistent there. At the time John33 did the merging, I think Garf wanted the merge to be called GT3b2, despite another GT3b2 existing which wasn't any good. I didn't realise that the old and mostly forgotten GT3b2 was still known

This GT3b2 should be exactly the same as the one John33 did so we decided to keep it consistent there. At the time John33 did the merging, I think Garf wanted the merge to be called GT3b2, despite another GT3b2 existing which wasn't any good. I didn't realise that the old and mostly forgotten GT3b2 was still known

Anyway, I'm all for a change to GT3b3. Any feedback on this?

Hi QuantumKnot,Indeed i'm a little bit paleolithic... No in fact maybe i've remembered some very old things about GT3b2 due to my status of very casual HA user...

So if i'm just the only one who thinks that the GT3b2 could make some confusion there is no need to inaugurate Gt3b3 name...Maybe you should keep it for an AoTuV/GT3b2 merge if there is such a project... (in case the dénomination change should increase confusion...)But why not let the HA ogg community give it's advice about this... I'm not a specialist afterall...regards,Tanguy